way to prove his point

Maybe if they would've let their engineers use Borland C++ they would've learned a thing or two for their own product.

I keep telling to the WinUI marketing team that instead of talking about how "great" doing XAML C++ is, they should actually buy a copy of C++ Builder.

And that's about the only type of visa where that happens.

try it, like these people https://www.youtube.com/shorts/7iJDMU43iUk

This smears out the definition of profit beyond usefulness.

I can pretty much guarantee hunter-gatherers hunt to not starve, children play for sheer joy, and nobody's thinking of profit.

There are better psychological/anthropological terms to apply to human drives than calling them "profitable". That's weird economist thinking, trying to bring everything under their purview.

Worse, it’s an attempt to get us to agree that humans only do things for profit, in order to advance an ideology and make our thought more malleable when an author turns around and starts writing about public policy and ethics applied to things that actually are about profit.

At least that’s what is going on when the schools of “thought” this kind of stuff comes from attempt it. This particular poster might not be. But usually it’s a cheap rhetorical trick, coming from folks who present themselves as simply following logic. Gross.

there's absolutely something wrong with the fruits of their labor though, which I am forced to use every day

not true at all, only socialists think that (I'm also from Europe where everybody and their dog's a socialist)

compared to what? most doctors never heard of Bayes rule